An Article on free will

[GodsGrace]

I work with the Scriptures-what's your point?

J.

No point...I stated what I wanted to say in the previous post.
I don't care to use commentaries, scholars, or any other source other than the bible.
Except in very few cases.

You like using other sources.
It's your prerogative.
it's just that I cannot reply to a really long post that uses other sources.

For instance, for this conversation you'd only have to reply as to why you believe we are guilty of Adam's sin
and reply to the fact that this would entail believing that babies that die unbaptized go to hell.

You seem to believe this has something to do with Catholicism...and so the discussion goes off the board, and the point is lost.
A few Protestant denominations baptize babies.
BUT...this is not a discussion about paedobaptism.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Are you saying that Hebrew today is different from the Hebrew in OT times?
I know someone who reads the bible in both Hebrew and Greek (he's a scholar)...
is he reading in the modern language?
I've never considered this.

Yes. He is reading a modern derivative. Invite him to join the forum. You can reference the ancient language of Moses either via "Proto-Hebrew, Paleo-Hebrew or "Biblical Hebrew". Such is conjectured to have originated in an early Phoenician script/language. I'd like to discuss this with him. He probably will not enjoy it...

There are many assumptions being made that have no place in reality. There are more questions than answers. Jerome believed he knew Hebrew as well. He didn't. He couldn't find extant Hebrew texts for his "Vulgate". He used Greek manuscripts to "fill in the gaps". I wish more people knew these facts. It would change their lives.

Why do you think they love the narrative I've explained?
Are you a fundamentalist believer and find this understanding to be against what YOU believe,
or is it just not acceptable to you?

It dishonors God. They have fabricated the context that man is the center of God's Universe.

Psa 8:4 What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him?

I actually believe that God doesn't need us at all. That God is self sufficient and is in NEED of nothing. This is the core concept of my theology. It explains everything. Mankind overvalues themselves. The value we have only exists in the benevolence of God. However, that is never a means to value our sins as if they're anything meaningful. People believe Christ anguish in the Incarnation is related to the value of their sin.

Do you place value in the Greek OT?
I really do not.
Every time a language is translated, something is lost.
So to go from Hebrew-------> Greek-------->English, is just too many steps.

Ah. Lets run with this.... I first took this comment on decades ago.

The Hebrew of the MT you reference is not the language of Moses. It is nothing more than a modern translation itself. Thusly, you have the block script written modern representation of the ancient Hebrew language transitioning from a script that doesn't fully exist anymore into the 9th century MT you prefer.

I see no difference between what you reject and what you prefer. Please detail how they're different. I'll wait. Ask you scholar to join and I'll deal with them.

The Greek OT was abandoned by those who hated God. It was offensive for the "circumcision" to be forced to embrace the Greek language of the Greek OT that was used by the apostles. That offense became the standard in Jerome.

Yes,,,I've always understood Jesus to mean at the time of Adam and Eve.
Did I give a different impression?
Maybe I didn't explain myself properly.

The above 2 paragraphs are pretty much how I feel about Protestantism today.
I see problems in all denominations.
I've become non-denominational.

I was just establishing that the creation event of Genesis is just about mankind. Not the entirety of reality. All have different beginnings.

Jesus spoke about the beginning in relation solely to Adam and Eve.

 

[Selah]

I agree.
The earth is about 3.5 billion years old.

This has nothing to do with Genesis which explains THE BEGINNING.
It doesn't state when that beginning was.

Those that believe the earth is 6 thousand years old use generations stated in the bible to do this.
This does not go back to the "beginning" but when God created man in HIS image.

I make no claim to really understand this.

Just like when Jesus returns, the millennium age will begin, I believe there was another age before Genesis.

 

[praise_yeshua]

I agree.
The earth is about 3.5 billion years old.

This has nothing to do with Genesis which explains THE BEGINNING.
It doesn't state when that beginning was.

Those that believe the earth is 6 thousand years old use generations stated in the bible to do this.
This does not go back to the "beginning" but when God created man in HIS image.

I make no claim to really understand this.

The origins of matter itself are of old. 3.5 billions years.... I don't believe it. What you do see is a mass of things drawn together that preexisted in an slightly organized construct that previously existed in some form. Matter being transform into detailed constructs.

Adam was fabricated from existing matter. Dust. Ashes.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Just like when Jesus returns, the millennium age will begin, I believe there was another age before Genesis.

There is a very good chance the millennial reign is an appeal to the life span of humanity first purposed in the life of Adam. (one thousand years).

Thusly it may be a indeterminate span of time instead of a literal construct where Christ physically reigns among all the nations. Christ reigns in us. In the newness of Life Eternal. An allegorical expression of life.

Not one hundred percent sure myself. Just talking.....

 

[praise_yeshua]

As for traditions-let me be clear, I don’t bash Catholics or Calvinists. We’re all part of the same body, united in Christ Jesus, not by labels but by faith in Him.

That said, you've just agreed with @Dizerner in affirming that God died on the cross-a serious claim. Referring to the God-Man in this way risks implying a rupture within the Triune Godhead, which Scripture never teaches.

We must tread carefully here to uphold the mystery of the incarnation without dividing the indivisible nature of the Trinity.

J.

When a man dies, when we die, do we cease to exist?

Such is the "second death".

 

[Selah]

There is a very good chance the millennial reign is an appeal to the life span of humanity first purposed in the life of Adam. (one thousand years).

Thusly it may be a indeterminate span of time instead of a literal construct where Christ physically reigns among all the nations. Christ reigns in us. In the newness of Life Eternal. An allegorical expression of life.

Not one hundred percent sure myself. Just talking.....

One fine Day, we’ll see and hear clearly.

 

[Selah]

When a man dies, when we die, do we cease to exist?

Such is the "second death".

A Christian will never ever cease to exist.

 

[TomL]

The love of Christ controls us Christians (2 Corinthians 5:14), so that I believe in Him whom He has sent is the work of God (the Word of God, John 6:29). Praise God for God's wonderful blessing poured out inside of us!!!

Your personally highly-favored approved repeated interpretation of "People who infer from this passage that faith is God’s gift are mistaken, for Christ does not show here what God produces in us, but what God wants and requires from us" results in your non-Word of God "This is the work of man and this is not the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent" (TomL 6:29), so you reject the love of Christ controls us and you do not receive Christ's precious, precise, perfect, and pure sayings “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent” (John 6:29).

You did not address much

You still ignore the connection between impart and infuse

You totally ignored this showing the connection between impart and infuse

View attachment 1701

Now let's look at the definition of infuse

To cause a person to become filled with a certain quality or principle

That matches your interpretation of Eph 2:8.

Where God causes man to be filled with faith.

Your theology teaches an infused faith.

This you do not address at all

and simply repeating your interpretation does nothing at all to prove your interpretation

And in regard to

John Calvin: “People who infer from this passage that faith is God’s gift are mistaken, for Christ does not show here what God produces in us, but what God wants and requires from us.” (The Crossway Classic Commentaries: John; Crossway Books; Wheaton, IL; 1994, p.393)



This is the work of God. This is the thing that will be acceptable to God, or which you are to do in order to be saved. Jesus did not tell them they had nothing to do, or that they were to sit down and wait, but that there was a work to perform, and that was a duty that was imperative. It was to believe on the Messiah. This is the work which sinners are to do; and doing this they will be saved, for Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth, Ro. 10:4.11 Albert Barnes, Notes on the New Testament: Luke & John (ed. Robert Frew; London: Blackie & Son, 1884–1885), 244.



Believe. Faith is put as a moral act or work. The work of God is to believe. Faith includes all the works which God requires. The Jews’ question contemplates numerous works. Jesus’ answer directs them to one work. Canon Westcott justly observes that “this simple formula contains the complete solution of the relation of faith and works.”11 Marvin Richardson Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (vol. 2; New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1887), 148–149.



The meaning is not,—that faith is wrought in us by God, is the work of God; but that the truest way of working the work of God is to believe on Him whom He hath sent.11 Henry Alford, Alford’s Greek Testament: An Exegetical and Critical Commentary (vol. 1; Grand Rapids, MI: Guardian Press, 1976), 761.



Messianic work.

28. τί ποιῶμεν …; What must we do (v. 5) that we may work? Perhaps they understood Him to mean that they must earn what they desire; certainly they see that Christ’s words have a moral meaning; they must do the works required by God. But how?

29. τὸ ἔργον. They probably thought of works of the law, tithes, sacrifices, &c. He tells them of one work, one moral act, from which all the rest derive their value, continuous belief (πιστεύητε, not πιστεύσητε) in Him whom God has sent. Comp. Acts 16:31. On ἵνα and ἀπέστειλεν see on 1:8, 33, 4:47, 17:3.1

1 A. Plummer, The Gospel according to S. John (Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1896), 155.



τὰ ἔργα τοῦ θεοῦ must not be taken to mean ‘the works which God works,’ but, as in Jer. 48:10 (31:10 LXX): 1 Cor. 15:58, the works well pleasing to God.11 Henry Alford, Alford’s Greek Testament: An Exegetical and Critical Commentary (vol. 1; Grand Rapids, MI: Guardian Press, 1976), 760–761.



Ἀπεκρίθη … καὶ εἶπεν 1:21, 50; 2:18. Jesus contrasts the one “work” that God actually requires (τὸ ἔργον τοῦ θεοῦ)—namely (epex. ἵνα), constant belief (πιστεύητε, pres. subjunc.) in his accredited messenger—with the many “works” the Jews imagined God demanded11 Murray J. Harris, John (Exegetical Guide to the Greek New Testament; B&H Academic, 2015), 131.



The Lord deals with the error and the truth in the question which was put to Him. In the one work which God requires of man and man owes to God, all fragmentary and partial works are included. It is a true work as answering to man’s will, but it issues in that which is not a work. This is the work of God, that ye believe on … Comp. 1 John 3:23 (his commandment).11 Brooke Foss Westcott and Arthur Westcott, eds., The Gospel according to St. John Introduction and Notes on the Authorized Version (Classic Commentaries on the Greek New Testament; London: J. Murray, 1908), 101.



29 Jesus replaces their "works of God" with the singular "work of God." But one thing is needful. And this one thing, he makes plain, is faith. They must believe on him (for the construction see on 1:12; the present tense here denotes the continuing attitude, not the once-for-all decision). In view of the controversy over faith and works reflected in the Epistle of James, it is interesting to find Jesus describing "work" as believing: God does not require that we pile up merits to obtain a heavenly credit. He requires that we trust him. The "work of God" means that which God requires of us. New international commentary of the New Testament



Yeshua-Jesus is telling them how to receive eternal life. The people then ask Yeshua-Jesus, [57]“What must we do, to be doing the works of God?” The response of the people is referring to how they can work and receive eternal life which is salvation. Yeshua-Jesus sets the record straight by answering, [58]“This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent.” In other words, Yeshua-Jesus tells them that if they want to do the works of God for eternal life then believe in him who God sent. That is the work needed for salvation, believe him, Yeshua-Jesus. Yeshua-Jesus did not tell them that the works of God are only for those who are chosen or elected. Then the people, they want to see a sign so that they can believe in him.



John 6:30 (KJV 1900) — 30 They said therefore unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee?



Garza, Dr. Al. Calvinism Challenged: How The Hebrew Bible, Jewish Sources, Jesus, The Apostles and Paul Refute Calvinism. . Sefer Press Publishing. Kindle

You just repeat your assumed understanding

Ignoring context and the opinion of multiple commentators

as well as scripture

John 6:35–40 (The New Testament: Translated from the Original Greek) — 35 Jesus said to them: I am the bread of life; he that comes to me shall never hunger; he that believes on me shall never thirst. 36 But I said to you, that you have seen me, and yet you do not believe. 37 All that the Father gives me, will come to me; and him that comes to me, I will by no means cast out. 38 For I came down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him that sent me. 39 And this is the will of him who sent me, that of all that he gives me, I shall lose nothing, but shall raise it up at the last day. 40 For this is the will of him that sent me, that every one who sees the Son, and believes on him, may have eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

which shows men are to come, see and believe on the son


John 6:47–51 (The New Testament: Translated from the Original Greek) — 47 Verily, verily I say to you, He that believes on me has eternal life. 48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and died. 50 This is the bread which comes down from heaven, that any one may eat of it, and not die. 51 I am the bread that lives, which came down from heaven. If any one eat of this bread, he shall live forever. And the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.


believe - eat of the bread

Edition.

 

[Kermos]

I believe the earth is billions and billions of years old. Consider the dinosaurs of old. What say you?

I agree.
The earth is about 3.5 billion years old.

This has nothing to do with Genesis which explains THE BEGINNING.
It doesn't state when that beginning was.

Those that believe the earth is 6 thousand years old use generations stated in the bible to do this.
This does not go back to the "beginning" but when God created man in HIS image.

I make no claim to really understand this.

"For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and made it holy" (Exodus 20:11) is so important that the Lord God Almighty wrote this as part of the Ten Commandments with His Own Finger (Exodus 31:18).

That's not "billions and billions of years old", but six days are enshrined in the Ten Commandments for the creation account recorded in Genesis chapter 1 to chapter 3.

And, Adam's son Seth was born when Adam was 130 years old, so that is not "3.5 billion years old".

These facts establish the full beginning, and when combined with genealogy and historical events recorded in the Bible, then 6,000 years old-ish for Earth is revealed up to today.

Dinosaurs were largely destroyed at the time of the flood during Noah's lifetime (the exception would be dinosaurs on the ark - think baby dinosaurs), just like all people with the exception of 8 persons per Holy Spirit inspired Apostle Peter "the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water" (1 Peter 3:20).

God is awesomely powerful, beyond man's understanding, yet God lovingly delivers understanding and life everlasting into God's children through God's Mighty Right Hand. Praise be to Lord and God Jesus Christ!!!

 

[GodsGrace]

Yes. He is reading a modern derivative. Invite him to join the forum. You can reference the ancient language of Moses either via "Proto-Hebrew, Paleo-Hebrew or "Biblical Hebrew". Such is conjectured to have originated in an early Phoenician script/language. I'd like to discuss this with him. He probably will not enjoy it...

Pretty funny PY.
He's a Catholic theologian, speaks 7 languages, taught in the middle east somewhere, is also a priest and I truly doubt he'll be joining any forum.
Most scholars will not due to the nonsense they have to hear.

I will, however, try to see him the week after Easter and will report back to you.
Remind me please, should I forget...lots going on here right now.

There are many assumptions being made that have no place in reality. There are more questions than answers. Jerome believed he knew Hebrew as well. He didn't. He couldn't find extant Hebrew texts for his "Vulgate". He used Greek manuscripts to "fill in the gaps". I wish more people knew these facts. It would change their lives.

Even the CC has issued a new bible based on more recent findings.
Other than that, I firmly believe we have but a taste of what any verse states.
Now some will take this to mean that I think the NT cannot be understood,,,,
No. This is not what I mean.

What I mean is that a lot if misinterpreted by those who THINK they understand scripture but really do not.
So...all the differing opinions on these forums.

It dishonors God. They have fabricated the context that man is the center of God's Universe.

Psa 8:4 What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him?

I don't see this...doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
I guess we all see what's important to us.
Here's my list:
Works are necessary for salvation. Good works not the works of The Law of course.
Eternal Security. Some believe salvation cannot be lost. Very dangerous belief it is.
Calvinism. The way calvinism distorts the nature of God is distressing to me.

I actually believe that God doesn't need us at all. That God is self sufficient and is in NEED of nothing. This is the core concept of my theology. It explains everything. Mankind overvalues themselves.

Agreed 100%

The value we have only exists in the benevolence of God. However, that is never a means to value our sins as if they're anything meaningful. People believe Christ anguish in the Incarnation is related to the value of their sin.

Could you expound?

Ah. Lets run with this.... I first took this comment on decades ago.

The Hebrew of the MT you reference is not the language of Moses. It is nothing more than a modern translation itself. Thusly, you have the block script written modern representation of the ancient Hebrew language transitioning from a script that doesn't fully exist anymore into the 9th century MT you prefer.

I see no difference between what you reject and what you prefer. Please detail how they're different. I'll wait. Ask you scholar to join and I'll deal with them.

PY I went back to see what you were discussing above, but I can't find it.
Please give me my post number....no 8259 doesn't seem to be the correct post.

The Greek OT was abandoned by those who hated God. It was offensive for the "circumcision" to be forced to embrace the Greek language of the Greek OT that was used by the apostles. That offense became the standard in Jerome.



I was just establishing that the creation event of Genesis is just about mankind. Not the entirety of reality. All have different beginnings.

Jesus spoke about the beginning in relation solely to Adam and Eve.

The creation event of Genesis is about the earth.
In Genesis 1 the earth was created for mankind.
Also in Genesis 2 except in the opposite direction...
man was created and then earth for him.

But there was also the initial creation of everything.
I do believe that the big bang happened and I do believe that this was the beginning of the universe.

Jesus refers to Adam and Eve as the beginning.
But wasn't that what was thought to be the beginning at that time?

 

[GodsGrace]

"For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and made it holy" (Exodus 20:11) is so important that the Lord God Almighty wrote this as part of the Ten Commandments with His Own Finger (Exodus 31:18).

That's not "billions and billions of years old", but six days are enshrined in the Ten Commandments for the creation account recorded in Genesis chapter 1 to chapter 3.

And, Adam's son Seth was born when Adam was 130 years old, so that is not "3.5 billion years old".

These facts establish the full beginning, and when combined with genealogy and historical events recorded in the Bible, then 6,000 years old-ish for Earth is revealed up to today.

Dinosaurs were largely destroyed at the time of the flood during Noah's lifetime (the exception would be dinosaurs on the ark - think baby dinosaurs), just like all people with the exception of 8 persons per Holy Spirit inspired Apostle Peter "the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water" (1 Peter 3:20).

God is awesomely powerful, beyond man's understanding, yet God lovingly delivers understanding and life everlasting into God's children through God's Mighty Right Hand. Praise be to Lord and God Jesus Christ!!!

You can believe what you will Kermos.
You have incorrectly understood the character of God so what you believe about the creation of the universe is of no importance to me.

It's no wonder some think we Christians are dumb.
Study some geology.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Pretty funny PY.
He's a Catholic theologian, speaks 7 languages, taught in the middle east somewhere, is also a priest and I truly doubt he'll be joining any forum.
Most scholars will not due to the nonsense they have to hear.

Most people prefer an echo chamber that only returns their own voice. I've been battling this topic among all this "nonsense on forums" for most of my life. I was a young man when I got into technology. I began "internet debate ministry" back when Yahoo chat was "the thing" at the time over a 14/36k modem. So I'm good with it. I thought 56k modem banks where spectacular at the time. The world has changed much since then.

I will, however, try to see him the week after Easter and will report back to you.
Remind me please, should I forget...lots going on here right now.

True. I struggle to stay connected anymore but the struggle is worth it. It is a difficult conversation. I will say, that knowing how to speak a language doesn't make you a linguistic expert. Many people make that mistake. Not saying it isn't impressive. It is better than I can do. I've never really tried to learn such. I study patterns and words. I deal with the semantic range of history and their overlap in the Scriptures. Such is necessary to understand the topic. It is more important than "speaking" the words properly.

Even the CC has issued a new bible based on more recent findings.
Other than that, I firmly believe we have but a taste of what any verse states.
Now some will take this to mean that I think the NT cannot be understood,,,,
No. This is not what I mean.

What I mean is that a lot if misinterpreted by those who THINK they understand scripture but really do not.
So...all the differing opinions on these forums.

The CC didn't recognize the full work of the Vulgate until over a thousand years later. Consider such.

I don't see this...doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
I guess we all see what's important to us.
Here's my list:
Works are necessary for salvation. Good works not the works of The Law of course.
Eternal Security. Some believe salvation cannot be lost. Very dangerous belief it is.
Calvinism. The way calvinism distorts the nature of God is distressing to me.

I disagree. The abandonment of faith is what disconnects a person from God. Faithful people sin. You do too. One "oh my" cancels thousands of "that a boy". Faithfulness includes believing God will just keep forgiving you. There is nothing good about our flesh. Nothing. It is weak and that weakness affects us greatly as we age. You might even get to where you don't eve remember your own name. Nothing good about such. God remains faithful to us. Thank God He does.

Could you expound?

Some people believe, whether they admit it or not, the greater their sin, the more God suffered for them. That there is a direct correlation between sinfulness and suffering in the Atonement of Christ. I don't see such myself. Suffering was for just a "moment" in the context of Eternal things. Christ triumphed over sin. He didn't struggle with sin in the Atonement. The best of us Incarnate is so much more than we allow Him. We want to drag Him down to our level. We see merit in the dirtiness of our sin.

PY I went back to see what you were discussing above, but I can't find it.
Please give me my post number....no 8259 doesn't seem to be the correct post.

No worries. Not important.

The creation event of Genesis is about the earth.
In Genesis 1 the earth was created for mankind.
Also in Genesis 2 except in the opposite direction...
man was created and then earth for him.

But there was also the initial creation of everything.
I do believe that the big bang happened and I do believe that this was the beginning of the universe.

Jesus refers to Adam and Eve as the beginning.
But wasn't that what was thought to be the beginning at that time?

Got it....

Most Hebrew scholars will attempt to declare that Genesis 1 references the origins of all of creation of all ages. "Something from nothing"....Such is not found in the Greek edition of Genesis 1.

I don't know how old all God's creative acts are. I believe there is more than what we read about in the narrative given for us in Genesis. Most people try to say that Genesis is the start of "time". That time is created. I don't believe that at all. I believe God is time. That time is order. Sequence. Progression. There is progression of thought even with God. Thoughts are predicated upon other thoughts. This "timelessness" that exists not the absence of time but rather an endless measure of time. Time without end.

There is no context of or lack thereof of order and sequence. Such is truly paradoxical. Not this nonsense of "timelessness" for God that largely came from CS Lewis.

I'm complicated...

 

[civic]

"For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and made it holy" (Exodus 20:11) is so important that the Lord God Almighty wrote this as part of the Ten Commandments with His Own Finger (Exodus 31:18).

That's not "billions and billions of years old", but six days are enshrined in the Ten Commandments for the creation account recorded in Genesis chapter 1 to chapter 3.

And, Adam's son Seth was born when Adam was 130 years old, so that is not "3.5 billion years old".

These facts establish the full beginning, and when combined with genealogy and historical events recorded in the Bible, then 6,000 years old-ish for Earth is revealed up to today.

Dinosaurs were largely destroyed at the time of the flood during Noah's lifetime (the exception would be dinosaurs on the ark - think baby dinosaurs), just like all people with the exception of 8 persons per Holy Spirit inspired Apostle Peter "the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water" (1 Peter 3:20).

God is awesomely powerful, beyond man's understanding, yet God lovingly delivers understanding and life everlasting into God's children through God's Mighty Right Hand. Praise be to Lord and God Jesus Christ!!!

We found something to which we are in agreement.

 

[civic]

You can believe what you will Kermos.
You have incorrectly understood the character of God so what you believe about the creation of the universe is of no importance to me.

It's no wonder some think we Christians are dumb.
Study some geology.

Here is something to consider. God created Adam on day 6 as an full grown adult- with age.

Could God have created the universe the same way with age to confound the wise ?

 

[Kermos]

No sorry he did not write

faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God
He did write

"by grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God"

Why do you truncate scripture to suit your theology

Faith and the pronoun "that' do not agree in gender, so faith is not a proper antecedent of the relative pronoun that







A simple by grace are you saved through faith will do quite nicely

Faith is a response of man

God does not believe for you; it is something you must do

Faith comes by hearing the word of God (Rom. 10:11-14), which is sent (or granted) first to the Jew and then the Gentile (Rom. 1:16). In other words, God is enabling faith by bringing the word of faith (His revelation), which is said to go first to Israel and then to “the high-ways and by-ways…the good and bad alike” (see the wedding banquet parable in Matt. 22). Remember, during the time of Paul, the Jews, generally speaking, had grown calloused to God’s revelation, otherwise they might have seen, heard, understood and turned to God, so the apostles took the message of repentance to the Gentiles, who unlike the Jews, “were willing to listen” (see Acts 28:27-28; John 12:39-41; Romans 9-11).



In the New Testament, faith is attributed to individuals rather than God thirty-nine times (Matt 9:2, 22, 29; 15:28; Mark 2:5; 5:34; 10:52; Luke 5:20; 7:50; 8:48; 17:19; 18:42; 22:32; Rom 1:8; 1 Cor 2:5; 15:14, 17; 2 Cor 1:24; 10:15; Eph 1:15; Phil 2:17; Col 1:4; 1 Thess 1:8; 3:2, 5, 6, 7, 10; 2 Thess 1:3; Phlm 6; Heb 10:23; 12:2; Jas 1:3; 2:18; 1 Pet 1:7, 9, 21; 2 Pet 1:5; 1 John 5:4).



Anyone Can Be Saved: A Defense of “Traditional” Southern Baptist Soteriology . Wipf & Stock, an


Um the Holy Spirit did not inspire Paul to write

faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God (Ephesians 2:8).


he did inspire him to write

"by grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God"

where salvation (through faith) is the gift as scripture shows

Romans 6:23 (NIV) — 23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Your "No sorry he did not write faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God" is provably anti-truth because Holy Spirit inspired Apostle Paul clearly wrote:

by grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God, not as a result of works, so that no one may boast for we are His work
(Ephesians 2:8-10)
​

So, he clearly conveys the work of grace, saved, and faith for us Christians is controlled by the work of God.

The God of all creation beautifully declares “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent” (John 6:29), and this Holy God means exactly what He says.

 

[GodsGrace]

Most people prefer an echo chamber that only returns their own voice. I've been battling this topic among all this "nonsense on forums" for most of my life. I was a young man when I got into technology. I began "internet debate ministry" back when Yahoo chat was "the thing" at the time over a 14/36k modem. So I'm good with it. I thought 56k modem banks where spectacular at the time. The world has changed much since then.

We go back a long time!
I worked with DOS back in the late 90's..all the commands had to be memorized.
Had yellow stickies all over my computer. Had to boot it up.
Paid more for my printer than a computer costs today.
Guess we witnessed progress.
If it is progress...sometimes I wonder if we weren't better off back then.
For several reasons...

True. I struggle to stay connected anymore but the struggle is worth it. It is a difficult conversation. I will say, that knowing how to speak a language doesn't make you a linguistic expert. Many people make that mistake. Not saying it isn't impressive. It is better than I can do. I've never really tried to learn such. I study patterns and words. I deal with the semantic range of history and their overlap in the Scriptures. Such is necessary to understand the topic. It is more important than "speaking" the words properly.

There are persons on these threads that refer to Strong's.
In some cases it could come in handy,,,I don't doubt it.
But, certainly, a language cannot be understood by using Strong's.
There are nuances in using words...different meanings.
As you've stated....can we even be absolutely sure how a word was used?
And, indeed, some hang on to one word as if the entire gospel depended on that one word.
Romans 5:12 is the perfect example. Just a little twist on what was most probably meant...
and all of Paul's teachings are dismissed because of this. Not only Paul's teachings, but those of the OT and NT.

The CC didn't recognize the full work of the Vulgate until over a thousand years later. Consider such.

Don't know too much about this.
I know that the CC has a lot right,
and has some wrong.
And I've never understood the hated for it.
I left that church about 40 years ago, but I harbor no ill-feelings...
except for the fact that do no teaching and this is very bad.

I disagree. The abandonment of faith is what disconnects a person from God. Faithful people sin. You do too. One "oh my" cancels thousands of "that a boy". Faithfulness includes believing God will just keep forgiving you. There is nothing good about our flesh. Nothing. It is weak and that weakness affects us greatly as we age. You might even get to where you don't eve remember your own name. Nothing good about such. God remains faithful to us. Thank God He does.

I agree. I think I didn't explain myself.
My favorite TOPICS are the ones I listed.
Eternal security would translate to OSAS. I do NOT believe in OSAS.
A person can abandon God and this will cause them to forfeit their salvation.

Some people believe, whether they admit it or not, the greater their sin, the more God suffered for them. That there is a direct correlation between sinfulness and suffering in the Atonement of Christ. I don't see such myself. Suffering was for just a "moment" in the context of Eternal things. Christ triumphed over sin. He didn't struggle with sin in the Atonement. The best of us Incarnate is so much more than we allow Him. We want to drag Him down to our level. We see merit in the dirtiness of our sin.

Wow. Never heard of this.
Always some new idea I guess.

Got it....

Most Hebrew scholars will attempt to declare that Genesis 1 references the origins of all of creation of all ages. "Something from nothing"....Such is not found in the Greek edition of Genesis 1.

Bara means from nothing.
But I understand that there's a problem here too.
I don't like to insist on topics I don't really understand.

I do, however, believe that something came from nothing.
If the universe did not always exist (as has been confirmed) then it had to start at some point.
Even if some matter was already existent....the question would still have to be answered as to where THAT matter came from.

I don't know how old all God's creative acts are. I believe there is more than what we read about in the narrative given for us in Genesis.

This is true. We cannot know everything. And....I believe God is a creator and is still creating.

Most people try to say that Genesis is the start of "time". That time is created. I don't believe that at all. I believe God is time. That time is order. Sequence. Progression. There is progression of thought even with God. Thoughts are predicated upon other thoughts. This "timelessness" that exists not the absence of time but rather an endless measure of time. Time without end.

Time. Was there time before the big bang?
Seems not.
Here's why: Science has been able to go back to the beginning up to a fraction of a second.
Science cannot seem to go back farther than that.
Why?
In most opinions it's because there WAS NOTHING before that!
Including time...or, at least, the TIME that we are familiar with.
If something that we cannot perceive existed, we surely will not know about it.

There is no context of or lack thereof of order and sequence. Such is truly paradoxical. Not this nonsense of "timelessness" for God that largely came from CS Lewis.

I'm complicated...

I think you're very logical and think things through.
And most never consider hermeneutics or linquistics, etc.
Maybe we make scripture to be more simple than it is.
Even Peter said that Paul is difficult to understand.

 

[GodsGrace]

Here is something to consider. God created Adam on day 6 as an full grown adult- with age.

Could God have created the universe the same way with age to confound the wise ?

No Civic.
Why would God want to confound us?
Rocks are billions of years old.
Can't get beyond that.
The waves that are received here on earth have taken billions of years to get this far.

I do believe God created Adam a fully grown man...no doubt about that.
But I also cannot believe God created everything in the six days as some believe.
OR
He could have.
I just don't feel this is important to know.

The universe is expanding and we can't seem to go back more than a fraction of a second of the big bang.
This says a lot to me. Just discussed this with @praise_yeshua in post 8277, just above.

 

[civic]

No Civic.
Why would God want to confound us?
Rocks are billions of years old.
Can't get beyond that.
The waves that are received here on earth have taken billions of years to get this far.

I do believe God created Adam a fully grown man...no doubt about that.
But I also cannot believe God created everything in the six days as some believe.
OR
He could have.
I just don't feel this is important to know.

The universe is expanding and we can't seem to go back more than a fraction of a second of the big bang.
This says a lot to me. Just discussed this with @praise_yeshua in post 8277, just above.

Carbon dating has been proven wrong as demonstrated with Mt St Helens dating.

 

[praise_yeshua]

We go back a long time!
I worked with DOS back in the late 90's..all the commands had to be memorized.

My first x86 was an IBM machine that only ran a word processing program that took 8 flops to boot to. You couldn't even save it on the MBs sized hard drive. It took 10 mins or more to boot and all I had was some IBM word processor they used in some colleges back then.

Had yellow stickies all over my computer. Had to boot it up.
Paid more for my printer than a computer costs today.
Guess we witnessed progress.
If it is progress...sometimes I wonder if we weren't better off back then.
For several reasons...

Agreed. Them old "dot matrix" printers were something else. I worked professional among Unisys mainframes for several years. 1100... 2200s and then A-Series before PC shared computing took over. Networking was 10 base T half duplex with millions of packet collisions everywhere.... but they worked at the time. I believe I had $1500 in that old IBM word processer with like a 10 inch "green screen". I miss some of that myself.

There are persons on these threads that refer to Strong's.
In some cases it could come in handy,,,I don't doubt it.

Strongs is good to a point. It allows quick cross referencing across languages. Especially if you combine the ABP+ edition that correlations Strong's #s to the Greek OT.

But, certainly, a language cannot be understood by using Strong's.
There are nuances in using words...different meanings.
As you've stated....can we even be absolutely sure how a word was used?
And, indeed, some hang on to one word as if the entire gospel depended on that one word.
Romans 5:12 is the perfect example. Just a little twist on what was most probably meant...
and all of Paul's teachings are dismissed because of this. Not only Paul's teachings, but those of the OT and NT.

We can do better with the Greek OT. We can trace common words at least back to the time where the sins of Israel "caught up with them". Such caused a division among those dispersed throughout all nations and the egomaniacs that stayed around in Israel. It is impossible to do this with the 9th century MT.

Don't know too much about this.
I know that the CC has a lot right,
and has some wrong.
And I've never understood the hated for it.
I left that church about 40 years ago, but I harbor no ill-feelings...
except for the fact that do no teaching and this is very bad.

I once was strong against them. I still am relative to the priestly order and grace they teach gets transferred in infant baptism. I see nothing wrong with infant baptism itself.

I agree. I think I didn't explain myself.
My favorite TOPICS are the ones I listed.
Eternal security would translate to OSAS. I do NOT believe in OSAS.
A person can abandon God and this will cause them to forfeit their salvation.

Got it. I for the most part, believe in if saved always saved. I do think some people believe they are saved and are not. I do also believe that I've meet people that I believe were once saved given what they believed, and have totally abandoned any sense of faith in Christ. I have hope for them but abandonment of God can become a disqualifying event. I once rejected this but I do believe this now.

Wow. Never heard of this.
Always some new idea I guess.

That is my assessment of PSA. The more PSA teaches damnation based upon the guilt of sin, the more they condemn themselves and turn their sin into the requirements of Christ's deeper sufferings.

Bara means from nothing.
But I understand that there's a problem here too.
I don't like to insist on topics I don't really understand.

I do, however, believe that something came from nothing.
If the universe did not always exist (as has been confirmed) then it had to start at some point.
Even if some matter was already existent....the question would still have to be answered as to where THAT matter came from..

Agreed. Paradoxical. I just don't place this at Genesis 1:1. I see no need to.

Time. Was there time before the big bang?
Seems not.
Here's why: Science has been able to go back to the beginning up to a fraction of a second.
Science cannot seem to go back farther than that.
Why?
In most opinions it's because there WAS NOTHING before that!
Including time...or, at least, the TIME that we are familiar with.
If something that we cannot perceive existed, we surely will not know about it.

The expansion of the "fabric" of elements involves a "canvas" of some sort. I don't really believe in the "big bang" so to speak. I reject the concept of having the ability to "see back in time" relative to teachings of Einstein in relativity of time and space.

If you think of time as nothing more than sequence or progression of any sort, then I think you will understand where I'm at. What is ....as it is now ......or at any "time" in history is predicated upon prior events. The experience of time is different for some. 1000 years as one day for example. Not saying that time passes by faster. Just saying being Eternal/Immortal creates a different perspective to God. Longsuffering has a more profound meaning relative to God than it does to us.

I think you're very logical and think things through.
And most never consider hermeneutics or linquistics, etc.
Maybe we make scripture to be more simple than it is.
Even Peter said that Paul is difficult to understand.

That he is. I read once somewhere, and I can't find it again, that Augustine read the book of Romans every day of his life. (might be an exaggeration). It caused me to really want to know Romans. I started digging and I believe God lead me to see things there that most people don't. Not calling "God" into my potential delusion....

Just saying I've given it much thought over the years. I don't see a single weakness at the moment in my position on the subject. It is an extraordinary book/epistle. Add the book of Hebrews and I'm blown away with the profoundness of Truth that comes from the Revelation of God to poor needy men such as ourselves.